GDIT didn’t miss a beat though when ISN left. Let’s also remember it was ISN who didn’t sign the contract not GDIT. They wanted to expand to the east of the MS. They didn’t understand that GDIT was not withholding work, but there just wasn’t any! They are feeling that now that CACI isn’t keeping them busy either. The bottom line is this…all of the primes got greedy when USIS left. They wanted a bigger piece of the pie and over saturated the market. IF and that’s a big IF they continue in the industry, you’re going to see a whole lot of cuts. Those who have just skated by are going to be looked at and removed. It’s going to but cutthroat
Clearly who was the ultimate decider in the ISN/GDIT split certainly depends on ones perspective…
Apparently CE haas been working for over a year. From my own experience I should have had a reinvestigation in the Fall 2018 but I recently checked with my employer and found out the OPM granted me a favorable adjudication and to my surprise, DOD granted my a TS in the Spring 2018. I did not complete a SF 86 nor did I have an interview.
Regarding GDIT -I think that GDIT mismanaged the contract by not signing ISN for the West Coast and got saddled with all the cases that OPM expected them to complete. This caused a backlog and OPM wopuild not assign any east cost cases until GDIT finished the West Coast. This caused GDIT to start paying TDY that was not cost effective and they brought in someone to fix it. He did by not consulting anyone in the contract and decided to cut their losses instead of fixing the problem. So now, hundreds or even thousands of hard working people are laid off.
As in favorable adjudication for the reinvesitgation? And so DoD reissued a TS before the reinvestigation date? (What has this world come to, the government is ahead for a change)
Your investigation date remains the same but the date you entered CE now appears.
So what exactly are they going off of?? An old SF86?? That’s so shocking. Glad they are ahead of the curve though
“GDIT didn’t miss a beat”
How so? 5 months later they are now longer on the contract.
Yes but it wasn’t due to work. The whole issue was that ISN was not getting any work because GDIT was sending their TDY investigators in. They didn’t close because they had all this work. I’m these last days there is no work! Remember they were the last to get work. They were at the bottom of the totem pole. There’s no backlog. They gave those cases back.
I’m going to guess, depending on what side of the fence a person sat on depended on what side of the version of the story a person received.
Perspecta is advertising for investigators on LinkedIn.
So was GDIT up until they ended the contract.
Which is crazy! What kind of nonsense is that?
FWIW, I heard from a friend that Perspecta BIs are getting new creds sent out this week. I guess they will be rolling into the new fiscal with DoD.
So I guess this rumor is over. Lol
Don’t know if this adds any fuel to the rumor fire, however, Eric Hess, the President of the Risk Decision Group (investigations) is reportedly stepping down effective 9/30.
Apparently CACI received approximately 800 cases from GDIT that requires rework on all of their cases…
Supposedly ISN employees that worked in California were told that ISN just did not want to deal with California labor laws any further. Those specific group of CA. FI’s were then handed over to CACI, should they individually choose to sign on. The rest of ISN investigators outside of CA. were “safe.”
That happened months ago.
GDIT failed when ISN left. Hired Ned Investigators in June and told them they were laying them off in July.
When GDIT took over CSRA, they wanted CSRA but not really the Investigations side. They slowly let it fail and the whole ISN divorce finished the deal and GDIT failed, which they, as a company, didn’t care. Perspecta rumors are valid and things will shape up starting next week on the truth concerning Perspecta. People will still have problems and CE will only bring those problems to light quicker. CE will result in more TESI’s being conducted to mitigate problems arising through continued evaluation. DoD/DCSA will realize this really quick. It’s more cost effective to hire private industry than federal employees. It would take years to make that happen. DCSA also has a goal of spreading the work among other DoD employees and that will fail as well when more security related incidents start happening based on people with little interest trying to cover the load. I also see many challenges with CE. CE will make the owning agencies become more involved in determining who goes in to CE and who goes out for a periodic reinvestigation. A lot of trust and work is being placed on the owning agencies. Will these agencies be truthful, when they see a concern and request an investigation? Or will they ignore the concern and send the person in to CE. Down the line I see a problem because most owning agencies are already under staffed and over worked and I see more agencies assuming the risk instead of putting issues out for investigative work. Down the line, I see problems with CE and an increase in security incidents because of this…